a posteriori: teleological + cosmological Flashcards
philosophy of religion: the argument from observation (a posteriori)
Teleological arguments
Arguments cast in terms of the telos or purpose of something.
Metaphor used by Aquinas in Summa Theologica.
Arrow directed by an archer.
William Paleys book.
Natural Theology.
William Paley’s analogies.
A clock watch and the human eye.
Key claims to validity made by Paley.
Inference of God is still valid even if:
- We had never seen a watch before.
- The watch did not work properly.
- Parts of the watch did not have a clear function.
Humes relevant work.
Concerning Natural Religion.
Aptness of analogy (Hume).
The analogy selected by religious philosophers is chosen for the specific wanted outcome, a cabbage also shows intricacy but doesnt infer a maker.
Epicurean thesis (Hume).
Theory the universe is made up of a finite number of particles in infinte time, so will create every possible combination.
Argument from cause to effect (Hume).
Leap of faith between the conclusion of an argument to the Christian God.
JS Mill’s argument against the teleological.
The flawed universe can only infer a flawed creator.
Anthony Kenney’s argument against the teleological.
Paleys argument “leads to a God which is no more source of good than the source of evil.”
Scientific theories that oppose the teleological argument.
Evolution, relativity and chaos.
F.R. Tennant’s anthropic principle.
View that the universe exists for the sake of humankind.
Argument against F.R Tennant’s.
The universe is so vast, barren and unexplored that many things to not contribute to human existence or have any apparent purpose.
Swinburne’s ockhams razor.
Idea that the simplest theory with the least number of assumptions is usually the most accurate.
Swinburne’s temporal order.
The ‘all-pervasivness’ of regularity in the universe. The commonality of regularity is impossible without a cosmic designer.
Scientific combat against ockhams razor.
Modern discoveries and theories like quantum theory implies vast complexity to what was prior seen as simple laws.
Who coined the term ‘cosmological’ and why.
Kant, to distinguish a priori and a posteriori arguments.
Aquinas’ argument from motion.
Everything that moves does so because it is moved, by this chain cannot continue forever and so there must be one initial mover which is unmoved - God.
Aquinas’ First Cause.
There is an order of efficient cause, but something cannot be its own efficient cause as it would have to exist before itself. If we could go on infintley in efficient causes which leads to infinite regress, so there would be no intermediate or end cause; therefore there must be a first cause - God.
Aquinas’ argument from necessity and contingency.
In nature everything is possible to be or possible not to be. This means it is impossible for them to always be, as something which is possible not to be will necessarily not be at some point. If this was true, then at some point nothing existed, which would mean nothing could exist now. Then things must exist because something has always been necessarily in existence. But if a necessary thing has its necessity caused by something else, then the infinite chain discussed in the first cause would occur, which is false. Therefore, there must be something for which its necessity lies in itself - God.
Hume’s problem with the terms ‘cause and effect’.
Right before, the cause is not yet the effect and after the effect is no longer the cause. The moment when cause is not yet the effect and the moment effect is no longer the cause is a mystery. He proposes that what we call ‘cause and effect’ is just our report of a statistical correlation or a ‘habit of the mind’.
The problem with calling God a cause.
He is a very different type of cause than any other scientific cause, and one which we have no experience of so is difficult to assume the existence of. We have no observational experience of the original event like with other theories around the start of the universe, similarly, many view God’s creation of the universe to be an on-going process and so is even less likely to be an observable thing.
Bertrand Russel on a ‘necessary’ being.
- If we are to describe God as the only necessary thing, as this means we have not experienced necessity
- There could have been many overlapping chains of contingent things
William Temple on infinite regression.
“It is impossible to imagine infinite regress, but it is not impossible to concieve it.” ‘Infinite’ does not contradict ‘regress’ the same way ‘square’ contradicts ‘circle’, meaning that there is no real reason why infinite regress is an impossibility.
Paul Tillich’s description of God.
“Ground of Being.”
Sufficient reason.
An explanation which itself requires no further explanation.
Father Copelston’s argument in radio show with Bertrand Russell.
“The totality of objects must have a reason external to itself” and that “in order to explain existence, we must come to a being which contains within itself the reason for its own existence, that is to say, which cannot not exist.”
The Fallacy of Composition.
The logical error of assuming what is true of the individual is true of the whole.
Argument against God as sufficient reason.
- Mystery and question around him.
- The problem of evil.
